Empathy is the answer.

APA came down with the empirical and evidence-based practice policies and made everyone feel bad. Suddenly all the counselors are terrified of not having “evidence” back up.

During that time, they decided Freud was silly. No one really liked him anyway. He was always getting in fights with Jung and Adler and other nice people.

And they froze in time.

Currently, the “intrapsychic conflict” of Freud’s theory is one of few, if not the only, theories of a person that have been scientifically proven. (Other ones being BF Skinner’s Behavioral Theory, for instance, but that’s hardly a theory of a person). There is plenty enough science now that the brain stem (survival = id) and cortex (socialized mind = superego) are in conflict.

Counsellors, stop pretending to be scientists. The better alternative is to listen to scientists.

Asolo gets this rap because they make excellent boots not just because they make a certain type of midsoles (i.e. other brands do too). Let me tell you what this is, and I’ll tell you why my next boot will still be Asolo 535.

What is it?

It is a phenomenon where your soles fall right off your boots suddenly one day.

A molded polyurethane (PU) midsole absorbs moisture over time and one day suddenly falls apart. Here is hydrolysis happening to a Nike. Asolo tells you to expect this at about 6 to 7-year mark. As noted below, while other brands also use the polyurethane midsole this is most noticeable in Asolos probably because boots from other brands are replaced before that.

If you’re curious, check out a few hiking boots manufacturers’ warranty webpage. You’ll find other manufacturers (especially good ones!) also using PU midsole because, really, it’s the best material.

Polyurethane crumbles into powder. So there is no way for a cobbler to glue it on. There appears to be two ways to resole this. One, to rip off the entire midsole and replace it with a Vibram and, two, reconstruct the midsole. I shipped my pair to Resole Patrol in North Carolina. I will report when I get them back. They are usually quick (a couple of weeks), but unfortunately mine fell apart days before Christmas.

The reason I picked Resole Patrol is because it looks like John remolds PU midsole. I do believe it is the best material. I really don’t want my soles to fall off in the middle of any longish hike. So I think I’ll just send my boots for resole at 6 year mark before the soles fall off.

I suggest you make a choice. Do you want boots that last beyond 7 years? Then you’ll need to be willing to spend these 7 years and beyond in soles lose your stride power and give you sore feet. If this is all acceptable to you, you probably didn’t need the excellent performance of Asolo 535 anyway.

Why is this an Asolo problem?

It isn’t.

This is known as an Asolo problem likely because Asolos make boots (“upper”) that last way longer than 7 years. Let me ask you. What happened to other hiking boots? They wore out, and you bought new ones. Maybe water soaked in. The ankle wrinkled and cut into the skin. The boot loosened, resulting in heel blisters. Or just got really ugly. Now, did any of those lasted 6 years?

I love my Asolo 535, and I know my next boots will also be Asolo 535. I say confidently because I worked and played in steep terrains (hiking 100 – 130 % straight up with load on regular basis) and worn out all major brands except Lowa (they don’t fit me). I hope the North Carolina guy can fix my boot. But if not, I’ll go out and buy a new pair of 535’s.

Many of you are probably wondering why the soles aren’t worn on my Asolos in the photo. It’s because I wear them mostly in the winter on snow. I’ve had other boots the last few years, and because of my shoulder injury, I haven’t done multi-day where I needed my Asolo 535. In the winter where I’m doing casual hikes through snow, though, I trust no other boots but Asolo 535 (no-Goretex version) with Snowseal to keep my feet dry all day.

This is not a “how-to” for the smoker. This is a “how-to” for people whose loved one smokes.

So I stopped smoking. Exactly how I always knew it would stop.

As nearly 100 % of the smokers, I started smoking in my teens. My friends were smoking, and I heard it made managing emotions easier. That wasn’t true. Not only did it not help dampen the emotions but also added the stress of bullying. (Did you notice that bullying is not ok unless the bullied person is fat or a smoker?)

I hid my smoking. I got really good at choosing places and angles to not get much of the smell on me or my clothes. But then someone would at some point shout really loudly and triumphantly “UGH! Who has been smoking!! It stinks!!”

I tried to explain to people that people who were just having a smoke a few minutes ago are exactly the ones who don’t need the added stress of being called out. But, you know how people are when they know they have an infallible argument. They yelled over me “SMOKING IS BAD FOR YOU.” Some even laughed.

I hid my smoking even better, and it’s been a few weeks since someone called me out in public.

And, just like that, I found myself not smoking.

I’m not saying this is something your loved one needs in order to stop smoking. Some people do need to be nagged into quitting. But it is very important that you nag because that’s what’s helpful for that person not because you need an outlet for your frustration of that person’s smoking. And the fact you can’t control their smoking.

Psychologists struggle and debate and argue over the definition of the word “intelligence.” Spearman, Thurstone, Gardner, Sternberg…

And one thing I see in common with them is this. They allow for the assumption that “intelligence” is a commonly and consistently understood entity that people are trying to qualitatively and quantitatively define. And this assumption is wrong.

The debate over the term “intelligence” will not ever be over unless they all agree that no one is thinking the same thing when they talk about “intelligence” and that’s why it can’t be defined this way.

Say, you and I agree that “beauty” is something that is pleasing to the eye and touches a soul. But once we start defining it qualitatively and quantitatively, I say a curvy woman, and you say a lean muscular man. I say a green forest, and you say a vacant rocky shore. To define “attractive,” I say “helpful, considerate, and insightful,” and someone may say “someone who can help me gain better social approval and self image.”

My point is that some things can only be defined as a concept, not what it actually looks like.

“Intelligence” is the “naturalcor acquired neural predisposition to excel.”

And it’s OK if everyone has a different definition from there on. Just make sure you add an adjective. Like the “g” intelligence, emotional intelligence, athletic intelligence.